Piffle wrote:
The next time she carpet-bombs a state and barges in on a ballot hearing, the next line of questions I'd like to asked:
Quote:
You've submitted voluminous transcipts and materials you represent as testimony and evidence admitted in a court proceeding in Georgia. Did that proceeding result in a judge or jury reaching formal findings of fact? ...pause, blather...Did it result in opinion or ruling? (If so...) Why didn't you include the court's findings of fact in your bundle of paper?
Isn't it true, Dr. Taitz, that the judge found your evidence to be unpersuasive and lacking in probative value? Isn't it true, Dr. Taitz, that the judge refused to qualify your so-called experts as experts within the meaning of the rules of evidence?
It's a simple strangle hold from which Orly has no painless way out.
Ah, but see,
we know what Orly will do, Piffle. But what she is counting on is that, in any hearing that she goes to, the Commission members will not. So, at least starting off, they will treat her with the respect they accord to all petitioners, letting her jump in and immediately take over the hearing to drive it off into her ditch.
Even if the chairman is able to regain some control, as this one did today with a 5-minute recess, she's gotten a chance to do what this is all about -- rouse the rabble, get some media buzz, and build up her "I was mistreated, they're all corrupt thugs" narrative.
I would dearly love to have a well-prepared commissioner question her, under oath, and especially follow through with the reference to a prosecutor when she commits perjury. One reason that she does, every time, is that she has never been held accountable for what she says under oath.
I'm even losing faith in Jill Nagamine. Everyone always seems to be so relieved to see the last of her that they just let her walk out and hope she doesn't come back.